Everett C. Gilbertson, Sui Juris
c/o general delivery
Battle Lake [zip code exempt]
MINNESOTA STATE
In Propria Persona
All Rights Reserved
without prejudice
DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
FOURTH DIVISION
Everett C. Gilbertson, ) Docket Number: CR-4-96-65
)
Plaintiff, ) NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR
) MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE:
v. )
) Rule 201(d):
United States, ) Federal Rules of Evidence;
and Does 1-99, ) Full Faith and Credit Clause
)
Respondents. )
______________________________)
COMES NOW Everett C. Gilbertson, Sui Juris, Citizen of Minnesota
state and Plaintiff in the above entitled matter (hereinafter
"Plaintiff"), to provide formal Notice to all interested parties,
and to demand mandatory judicial notice by this honorable Court,
pursuant to Rule 201(d) of the Federal Rules of Evidence and to
the Full Faith and Credit Clause in the Constitution for the
United States of America, of the NOTICE OF INTENT TO PETITION FORLEAVE TO INSTITUTE QUO WARRANTO PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE "INTERNALREVENUE SERVICE [sic], as filed in People v. United States et
al., DCUS Montana, Billings Division, Case Number #CV-96-163-BLG.
Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all facts and laws as
cited therein, as if the same were set forth fully herein.
Ninth Notice and Demand for Mandatory Judicial Notice:
Page 1 of 8
VERIFICATION
I, Everett C. Gilbertson, Sui Juris, hereby verify, under penalty
of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America,
without the "United States", that the attached documents are true
and correct copies of the originals, to the best of My current
information, knowledge, and belief, so help Me God, pursuant to
28 U.S.C. 1746(1).
Dated: ______________________________
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Everett C. Gilbertson
_____________________________________
Everett C. Gilbertson, Sui Juris
Citizen of Minnesota state
(expressly not a citizen of the United States)
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
Ninth Notice and Demand for Mandatory Judicial Notice:
Page 2 of 8
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, Everett C. Gilbertson, Sui Juris, hereby certify, under
penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of
America, without the "United States," that I am at least 18 years
of age, a Citizen of one of the United States of America, and
that I personally served the following document(s):
NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR
MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE:
Rule 201(d), Federal Rules of Evidence;
Full Faith and Credit Clause
by placing one true and correct copy of said document(s) in first
class United States Mail, with postage prepaid and properly
addressed to the following:
Henry Shea
United States Attorneys
110 South Fourth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota state
Attorney General
Department of Justice
10th & Constitution, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
Solicitor General
Department of Justice
10th & Constitution, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
Dated: __________________________________
/s/ Everett C. Gilbertson
__________________________________________
Everett C. Gilbertson, Sui Juris
Citizen of Minnesota state
(expressly not a citizen of the United States)
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
Ninth Notice and Demand for Mandatory Judicial Notice:
Page 3 of 8
Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Citizen of Arizona state, federal witness,
Counselor at Law, and Relator
c/o 2509 N. Campbell Avenue, #1776
Tucson, Arizona state
zip code exempt
Under Protest, Necessity, and
by Special Visitation
DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MONTANA
BILLINGS DIVISION
People of the United States ) Case No. CV-96-163-BLG
of America, ex relatione )
Paul Andrew Mitchell, ) NOTICE OF INTENT TO PETITION
) FOR LEAVE TO INSTITUTE QUO WARRANTO
Petitioners, ) PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE
) "INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE" [sic]
v. )
) This is a 60-day letter.
United States et al., )
) All Writs Statute:
Respondent. ) 28 U.S.C. 1651
____________________________)
COME NOW the People of the United States of America (hereinafter
"Petitioners"), ex relatione Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.,
Citizen of Arizona state, federal witness, and Counselor at Law
(hereinafter "Relator"), to provide formal Notice to all
interested party(s), and to demand mandatory judicial notice by
this honorable Court, pursuant to Rules 201(d), 301, and 302 of
the Federal Rules of Evidence, of Petitioners' intent to petition
this honorable Court for leave to institute Quo Warranto
proceedings against the organization known as the "Internal
Revenue Service" (hereinafter "IRS"), and to do so at the end of
sixty (60) calendar days, which day is Friday, April 4, 1997.
Ninth Notice and Demand for Mandatory Judicial Notice:
Page 4 of 8
In 1972, Internal Revenue Manual 1100 was published in both
the Federal Register and Cumulative Bulletin (see 37 Fed. Reg.
20,960; 1972-2 Cum. Bul. 836). The very first page of the
Bulletin's "Statement of Organization and Functions" includes the
following admission concerning the lawful creation of the IRS:
(3) By common parlance [sic] and understanding of the time,
an office of the importance of the Office of Commissioner of
Internal Revenue was a bureau. The Secretary of the
Treasury, in his report at the close of the calendar year
1862 stated that "The Bureau of Internal Revenue has been
organized under the Action of the last session ...." Also
it can been seen that Congress intended to establish a
Bureau of Internal Revenue, or thought they had, from the
act of March 3, 1863, in which provision was made for the
President to appoint with Senate confirmation a Deputy
Commissioner of Internal Revenue "who shall be charged with
the duties in the bureau of internal revenue as may be
prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury, or as may be
require by law, and who shall act as Commissioner of
Internal Revenue in the absence of that officer, and
exercise the privilege of franking all letters and documents
pertaining to the office of internal revenue." In other
words, "the office of Internal Revenue," was the "Bureau of
Internal Revenue," and the act of July 1, 1862, is the
organic act of today's Internal Revenue Service.
[emphasis added]
This statement clearly admits the absence of any specific
statute or other legislation creating the Bureau of Internal
Revenue and its present day alter ego -- the IRS -- as a duly
constituted agency of the United States (federal government).
The Act of 1862 cited supra only created the Office of the
Commissioner, not the Bureau of Internal Revenue, nor the IRS.
Furthermore, the Acts of July 1, 1862, and March 3, 1873,
were both repealed and were not re-enacted by the Revised
Statutes of 1873. If there were a specific Act creating the
Bureau, the publication would have so stated, rather than to rely
upon the claim that Congress "thought they had created the
Bureau".
Ninth Notice and Demand for Mandatory Judicial Notice:
Page 5 of 8
Thus, the IRS was not established by the Constitution, has
never been created by any Act of Congress, and is not a duly
constituted office of the United States (federal government).
See United States v. Germaine, 99 U.S. 508 (1879); Norton v.
Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 441 6 S.Ct. 1121 (1886) ("there can
be no officer, either de jure or de facto, if there be no office
to fill"); United States v. Mouat, 124 U.S. 303, 8 S.Ct. 505
(1888); United States v. Smith, 124 U.S. 525, 8 S.Ct. 595, 607,
21 S.Ct. 891 (1901) ("The law creates the office, prescribes its
duties"); Cochnower v. United States, 248 U.S. 405, 407, 39
S.Ct. 137 (1919) ("Primarily we may say that the creation of
offices and the assignment of their compensation is a legislative
function .... And we think the delegation must have clear
expression or implication"); Burnap v. United States, 252 U.S.
512, 516, 40 S.Ct. 374, 376 (1920); Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchel,
269 U.S. 513, 46 S.Ct. 172, 173 (1926); N.L.R.B. v. Coca-Cola
Bottling Co. Of Louisville, 350 U.S. 264, 269, 76 S.Ct. 383
(1956) ("'Officers' normally means those who hold defined
offices. It does not mean the boys in the back room or other
agencies of invisible government, whether in politics or in the
trade-union movement."); Crowley v. Southern Ry. Co., 139 F.
851, 853 (5th Cir. 1905); Adams v. Murphy, 165 F. 304 (8th Cir.
1908); Scully v. United States, 193 F. 185, 187 (D.New. 1910)
("There can be no offices of the United States, strictly
speaking, except those which are created by the Constitution
itself, or by an act of Congress"); Commissioner v. Harlan, 80
F.2d. 660, 662 (9th Cir. 1935); Varden v. Ridings, 20 F.Supp.
495 (E.D. Ky. 1937); Annoni v. Blas Nadal's Heirs, 94 E.2d 513,
515 (1st Cir. 1938); and Pope v. Commissioner, 138 F.2d 1006,
1009 (6th Cir. 1943).
Ninth Notice and Demand for Mandatory Judicial Notice:
Page 6 of 8
Furthermore, neither the Respondents, nor the IRS, nor any
of their agencies, assigns, or instrumentalities, may claim
standing without first alleging facts to show the standing to be
true:
Standing cannot be inferred argumentatively from averments
in the pleadings, but rather must affirmatively appear in
the record; it is the burden of the party who seeks the
exercise of jurisdiction in his favor clearly to allege
facts demonstrating that he is a proper party to invoke
judicial resolution of the dispute; the parties must allege
facts essential to show jurisdiction, and if they fail to
make the necessary allegations, they have not standing.
[FW/PBS, Inc. v. Dallas, 493 U.S. 215]
[110 S.Ct. 596, 107 L.Ed.2d. 603]
[emphasis added]
Unlike most state courts of general jurisdiction, in which
jurisdiction is generally presumed unless contrary is
demonstrated, in federal district courts absence of
jurisdiction is generally presumed unless party invoking
federal jurisdiction clearly demonstrates that it exists.
[State of La. v. Sprint Communications Co.]
[892 F.Supp. 145]
[emphasis added]
Dated: February 4, 1997
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Citizen of Arizona state, federal witness,
and Counselor at Law
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
Ninth Notice and Demand for Mandatory Judicial Notice:
Page 7 of 8
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S., Citizen of Arizona state,
federal witness, and Counselor at Law, do hereby certify, under
penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of
America, without the "United States", that I am at least 18 years
of age, a Citizen of one of the United States of America, and
that I personally served the following document(s):
NOTICE OF INTENT TO PETITION FOR LEAVE
TO INSTITUTE QUO WARRANTO PROCEEDINGS AGAINST
THE "INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE":
This is a 60-day letter.
All Writs Statute: 28 U.S.C. 1651
by placing one true and correct copy of same in first class U.S.
Mail, with postage prepaid and properly addressed to:
Attorney General William H. Rehnquist, C.J.
Department of Justice Supreme Court of the U.S.
10th and Constitution, N.W. 1 First Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C.
Solicitor General Warren Christopher
Department of Justice U.S. Secretary of State
10th and Constitution, N.W. Department of State
Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C.
James M. Burns LeRoy Michael; Schweitzer
United States District Court c/o Yellowstone County Jail
316 North 26th Street 3165 King Avenue, East
Billings, Montana state Billings, Montana state
Office of the U.S. Attorneys Judge J. Clifford Wallace
United States District Court Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
Federal Building c/o P.O. Box 193939
Billings, Montana state San Francisco, California
Chief Judge Judge Alex Kozinski
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
c/o P.O. Box 193939 125 South Grand Avenue, #200
San Francisco, California state Pasadena, California state
Executed on February 4, 1997:
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Citizen of Arizona state, federal witness,
Counselor at Law, and Relator
Ninth Notice and Demand for Mandatory Judicial Notice:
Page 8 of 8
# # #